Hi Guys, I'm having a few problems with my DSTM miner and wondered if any of you have come across the error before. Unfortunately my mining keeps getting interrupted every minute or so with the following error:

any help/suggestions would be much appreciated, I have already tried alternate pools so I have ruled that out. I may try another miner but from what I've heard DSTM is the best for equihash so i'd much rather stick with it. Any ideas??

WiFi is evil for mining.

Yes. Wireless connection good for tits, cats, and stupid youtube movies. For stable works - wire only, without variants.

Now if you can avoid it, yes Wireless isn't good for everything. Though I've had a rig, now going on 6+ months, wireless only. Works perfectly fine delivering results.

Though playing with my 1060's a little more recently since I was able to drop the run temps by almost 10C, figured I could get a little more out of them. Very happy with the setups and up times. 30+ days straight on my 1060 rig before I started tweaking, case switch and windows updates.

I am still a bit confused about the following: Is temp target parameter really temperature limit parameter or will the miner try to reach and maintain this temperature as the word "target" suggests? Thank you.

I am still a bit confused about the following: Is temp target parameter really temperature limit parameter or will the miner try to reach and maintain this temperature as the word "target" suggests? Thank you.

I have tried almost all clocks in order to stabilise it. Now I am running with no clocks only 80% power limit and it keeps crashing. I noted that when temp limit is set to 70C rig is more stable.

Can you please someone assist me as I am desperate for help. Please help me what can be the problem here?!

Regards,Hristo

The error message contains also the gpu-id of the GPU which failed to execute this particular call. Try to disable the affected GPU by using the '--dev' option - it could be faulty. In general: if you have stability issues on multi-gpu systems, try to to run zm on a single GPU only, in order to minimize the effects of thermal or power supply issues.

I am still a bit confused about the following: Is temp target parameter really temperature limit parameter or will the miner try to reach and maintain this temperature as the word "target" suggests? Thank you.

ZM maximizes the amount of submitted work (i.e. the utilization of the GPU) such that the temperature of the GPU is less or equal to the temp-target.

is it possible to make your miner compatible with Equihash 192,7 parameters ?I hope so because there is only 1 for these parameters and it completely sucks and doesnt get updated...So if your Miner would be only a bit more stable and would have a cuda implementation you would get the majority of miners on your miner.That would generate you like atleast 2k Zero (which equals to about 2k dollars) a month.

If you want a bounty that is also possible. I look foward to your response.

thanks for your work dstm. I'm gonna ask a question about not being able to achieve enough shares.

I run 8 x 1070 in one rig, 6 x 1080Ti in one rig and 5 x 1080Ti in one rig. they all run together in their own rig build. I mean, I run zm batch to work 8x1070 together and others respectably in their own.

while running, the target difficulty is set by the server (any chance to achieve static difficulty through miner?). the target difficulty is somehow too high for the 1080Tis which in return I get only 7,5 - 10 shares per minute in average; that being said I get zero returns on payment on some blocks randomly.

but with the 1070s, even though they are %60 solutions capable against 1080Tis, I have around 60 shares per minute in average.

you can say that the size of the share 1080Tis get is larger than 1070, I agree, but it is like more than 6 times the share I get with 1080Tis. so considering the solution power of two, 6 times is much bigger than %60 solution power in between these two.

I've tried this while mining BTCG in suprnova and MPH. I think this is because the target difficulty setting.

Yes, there are lots of posts all over the internet about how to adjust OC settings in Linux, but there aren't any (I don't think?) graphical tools like Afterburner. You use the command line (see below), and once you figure things out, it's actually better than Afterburner. Everything based in percentages is really useless for sharing with others. For example, telling someone you set the power to 70% is useless without knowing what the TDP is for a particular card. However, telling someone the specific wattage setting + the card is better.

Here's what I use with my 6x Asus ROG Strix 1070s:

Code:

# These two lines allow me to run the rig 'headless' (without a monitor)# Without them, the nvidia commands below won't run unless you log into the Ubuntu graphical UI.export XAUTHORITY=/var/run/lightdm/root/:0export DISPLAY=:0

I run 8 x 1070 in one rig, 6 x 1080Ti in one rig and 5 x 1080Ti in one rig. they all run together in their own rig build. I mean, I run zm batch to work 8x1070 together and others respectably in their own.

while running, the target difficulty is set by the server (any chance to achieve static difficulty through miner?). the target difficulty is somehow too high for the 1080Tis which in return I get only 7,5 - 10 shares per minute in average; that being said I get zero returns on payment on some blocks randomly.

but with the 1070s, even though they are %60 solutions capable against 1080Tis, I have around 60 shares per minute in average.

you can say that the size of the share 1080Tis get is larger than 1070, I agree, but it is like more than 6 times the share I get with 1080Tis. so considering the solution power of two, 6 times is much bigger than %60 solution power in between these two.

I've tried this while mining BTCG in suprnova and MPH. I think this is because the target difficulty setting.

Honestly, I think you'll need to wait for a payout to see if you can see the earnings differences - looking at hash or share rate alone (particularly at the pool level!) to compare completely different rigs isn't going to be accurate. Earnings per rig is pretty much the only way to determine anything.

That said, if you're looking to have the same target difficulty across all your rigs, you might try running a mining proxy. Makes things slightly more efficient networking wise as well. I have recently created one that works with equihash (and other algos/coins) called aiostratum-proxy (see my signature as well).

I run 8 x 1070 in one rig, 6 x 1080Ti in one rig and 5 x 1080Ti in one rig. they all run together in their own rig build. I mean, I run zm batch to work 8x1070 together and others respectably in their own.

while running, the target difficulty is set by the server (any chance to achieve static difficulty through miner?). the target difficulty is somehow too high for the 1080Tis which in return I get only 7,5 - 10 shares per minute in average; that being said I get zero returns on payment on some blocks randomly.

but with the 1070s, even though they are %60 solutions capable against 1080Tis, I have around 60 shares per minute in average.

you can say that the size of the share 1080Tis get is larger than 1070, I agree, but it is like more than 6 times the share I get with 1080Tis. so considering the solution power of two, 6 times is much bigger than %60 solution power in between these two.

I've tried this while mining BTCG in suprnova and MPH. I think this is because the target difficulty setting.

Honestly, I think you'll need to wait for a payout to see if you can see the earnings differences - looking at hash or share rate alone (particularly at the pool level!) to compare completely different rigs isn't going to be accurate. Earnings per rig is pretty much the only way to determine anything.

That said, if you're looking to have the same target difficulty across all your rigs, you might try running a mining proxy. Makes things slightly more efficient networking wise as well. I have recently created one that works with equihash (and other algos/coins) called aiostratum-proxy (see my signature as well).

thanks for your interest.

I speak of share numbers alone just to indicate the problem easier. other than that, I do check the earnings. for example in transaction history, 1080Tis get way low earnings despite their hash power. many shares in chunks surpasses low share numbers in larger -so to speak- amounts. that's why I ask about static target difficulty.

is it possible to make your miner compatible with Equihash 192,7 parameters ?I hope so because there is only 1 for these parameters and it completely sucks and doesnt get updated...So if your Miner would be only a bit more stable and would have a cuda implementation you would get the majority of miners on your miner.That would generate you like atleast 2k Zero (which equals to about 2k dollars) a month.

If you want a bounty that is also possible. I look foward to your response.

Other Equihash instances is really something I want to support in future versions since it was requested multiple times - however zm's core development consumes a lot time currently so I can't say anything about the time frame.

I run 8 x 1070 in one rig, 6 x 1080Ti in one rig and 5 x 1080Ti in one rig. they all run together in their own rig build. I mean, I run zm batch to work 8x1070 together and others respectably in their own.

while running, the target difficulty is set by the server (any chance to achieve static difficulty through miner?). the target difficulty is somehow too high for the 1080Tis which in return I get only 7,5 - 10 shares per minute in average; that being said I get zero returns on payment on some blocks randomly.

but with the 1070s, even though they are %60 solutions capable against 1080Tis, I have around 60 shares per minute in average.

you can say that the size of the share 1080Tis get is larger than 1070, I agree, but it is like more than 6 times the share I get with 1080Tis. so considering the solution power of two, 6 times is much bigger than %60 solution power in between these two.

I've tried this while mining BTCG in suprnova and MPH. I think this is because the target difficulty setting.

Honestly, I think you'll need to wait for a payout to see if you can see the earnings differences - looking at hash or share rate alone (particularly at the pool level!) to compare completely different rigs isn't going to be accurate. Earnings per rig is pretty much the only way to determine anything.

That said, if you're looking to have the same target difficulty across all your rigs, you might try running a mining proxy. Makes things slightly more efficient networking wise as well. I have recently created one that works with equihash (and other algos/coins) called aiostratum-proxy (see my signature as well).

thanks for your interest.

I speak of share numbers alone just to indicate the problem easier. other than that, I do check the earnings. for example in transaction history, 1080Tis get way low earnings despite their hash power. many shares in chunks surpasses low share numbers in larger -so to speak- amounts. that's why I ask about static target difficulty.

I will check your post, thank you.

Difficulty is set by the server. Mining software has to submit shares which satisfy the difficulty requirements set by the server otherwise the server will reject the shares. However some servers allow you to request a particular difficulty, they often simply use/'misuse' the password field for it. In this case the server reads the password field (containing your difficulty request) and starts to submit jobs according to your requested difficulty.

If the math is done right on the pool side there should be really no disadvantages for your 1080Ti rig - however there is probability involved so you really have to compare the numbers (e.g. payouts) of multiple days.

Just for a benchmark I'm running two rigs each with a EVGA 1070 and a MSI GTX 1050ti and getting 650ish Sol's (450 on the 1070 and 185-190 on the 1050ti). 1070 is set to 65% power limit, 75 core clock, 100 mem and the 1050ti is at 80% power, 150 core and 200 mem.

I run 8 x 1070 in one rig, 6 x 1080Ti in one rig and 5 x 1080Ti in one rig. they all run together in their own rig build. I mean, I run zm batch to work 8x1070 together and others respectably in their own.

while running, the target difficulty is set by the server (any chance to achieve static difficulty through miner?). the target difficulty is somehow too high for the 1080Tis which in return I get only 7,5 - 10 shares per minute in average; that being said I get zero returns on payment on some blocks randomly.

but with the 1070s, even though they are %60 solutions capable against 1080Tis, I have around 60 shares per minute in average.

you can say that the size of the share 1080Tis get is larger than 1070, I agree, but it is like more than 6 times the share I get with 1080Tis. so considering the solution power of two, 6 times is much bigger than %60 solution power in between these two.

I've tried this while mining BTCG in suprnova and MPH. I think this is because the target difficulty setting.

Honestly, I think you'll need to wait for a payout to see if you can see the earnings differences - looking at hash or share rate alone (particularly at the pool level!) to compare completely different rigs isn't going to be accurate. Earnings per rig is pretty much the only way to determine anything.

That said, if you're looking to have the same target difficulty across all your rigs, you might try running a mining proxy. Makes things slightly more efficient networking wise as well. I have recently created one that works with equihash (and other algos/coins) called aiostratum-proxy (see my signature as well).

thanks for your interest.

I speak of share numbers alone just to indicate the problem easier. other than that, I do check the earnings. for example in transaction history, 1080Tis get way low earnings despite their hash power. many shares in chunks surpasses low share numbers in larger -so to speak- amounts. that's why I ask about static target difficulty.

I will check your post, thank you.

just a suggestion to check,is there some stability problem you might miss?there should be comparable difference hash-power to payout,unless that miner is really unlucky(low number of shares because of really bad luck)...but give it few days and it should stabilise (also pplns vs other payout methods,don't switch pools)...so,check log if there are no restarts/reconnects or some gpu slowing down